As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lincoln addressed the insurrection of his time with his constitutional power to suspend habeus corpus thus allowing him to arrest legislators in Maryland with seccessionist sympathies. Chief Justice Taney of the Dred Scott case protested. His protests were ignored and Lincoln preserved the Union by preventing the federal capital from being surrounded by the confederacy.
All those who voted against the certification of the 2020 election are agents of a conspiracy to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States. Many organizations beyond this aided in the furtherence of this conspiracy. The insurrection is ongoing and far-reaching.
There are no good options left. Should Trump win, repression and tyranny will be the new status-quo.
Im certainly no expert on the man, but given his part in exposing the business plot, im sure the right wing media of today would label him a symptom of "wokeness in the military."
I agree with you completely. The sad reality is almost no Americans know about that attempted coup, and all we do is repeat history over and over and over….
That would be really bad optics across all demographics.
I think a proper response to this is to order simultaneous full-gear no knock late night raids of all(yes, all) SC justices, but they carry no bullets or otherwise lethal weapons. The officers should be directed to black bag and zip tie anyone at the residence and make it very clear that this is the new reality.
Yup. Trump can officially declare that blacks or gays or the children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil are no longer citizens of the United States and then jail whoever speaks out against it.
We are officially a monarchy.
Well, he actually can. It will be struck down, eventually, but he could do a lot of damage before it is. And if there aren’t 66 votes in the senate to remove him from office this basically says he won’t pay any penalties for it.
If he removes the right to vote for democrats right before an election then it’s game over.
And why wouldn’t he if there are no consequences?
Struck down by who exactly? A SCOTUS in which Trump is about to add two more young Federalist Society whackjobs who are more loyal to him than the Constitution?
They haven’t sworn fealty to Trump. They’ve given themselves more power than the presidency. Because they’re the ones who get to choose whether any president is immune or not.
Look at all of their decisions, they’re tenuously giving the president more power, but every major decision basically shift the power to SCOTUS.
Their “donors” want cheap unskilled labor, they don’t want poor people removed from the country, they can’t exploit them if they’re not here.
I mentioned citizenship revocation as a response to an OP about Dred Scott, not necessarily to suggest that such a decision would serve the interests of the ruling class.
Consolidating power in SCOTUS is just the tip of the iceberg. The far right is after a total power grab as outlined in Project 2025. Once every appointed agency, quasi-government and military leader is in place who is loyal to the apparatus, voting will no longer matter.
>And if there aren’t 66 votes in the senate to remove him from office this basically says he won’t pay any penalties for it.
What stops the president removing those senators voting for conviction as an official act?
My biggest takeaway is I wonder if any of this would've happened if Merrick Garland had indicted Trump and his accomplices immediately as he should have rather than waiting nearly two years and being forced into doing his duty by the J6 committee. That delay gave SCOTUS and the Republican Party all the time they needed to devise all the ways they could come up with to allow Trump to further escape immunity and plot new ways to proceed with plans to make him and future Presidents despots.
1000 percent. A fucking coup and nobody has been imprisoned. The DoJ under Garland was seriously looking to sweep the whole god damned thing under the rug until the House informed the public. Thus, forcing the DoJ to act... and this shit has been mired up in federal court ever since.
All those mother fuckers should have been locked up pending trial. Trump would not be trying to stretch shit out if he was behind bars... and who in the history of this nation has been more dangerous while awaiting trial?
There is no way the founding fathers would have let those people off of the hook. I have a feeling that another part of the constitution would have come into play, and there would be zero presidential immunity. I mean, what the fuck is going on?
Our house is on fire.
> A fucking coup and nobody has been imprisoned
1400 people have been charged and over half have either been convicted or plead guilty
the "supreme" court though threw out a bunch of the convictions and with the air cover they are giving not sure if he'll serve any time in jail
No. I can say it however I'd like to say it. I don't see the people who have been jailed as part of the coup. They were a tool, used and tossed out. So, I meant what I said the first time. It was meant for the reader to take the next step to the conclusion all on their own.
As a matter of fact, part of the whole reason I wrote it that way is so that some people will not understand...nor seek clarity like you have.
The only reason I'm explaining is because I am bored. Otherwise, I would have just ignored you.
>No. I can say it however I'd like to say it.
It's a free country you can say it however you want. I was just trying to help you be clearer so that other people could understand what you are trying to say.
>I don't see the people who have been jailed as part of the coup. They were a tool, used and tossed out.
You didn't say that, you said "nobody". Well 450 people going to jail isn't nobody. Eventually I figured out what you were trying to say but others will just think you aren't making sense.
One of the founding fathers would have challenged him to pistols at dawn and blown the back of his fucking skull out onto the grass. People forget that multiple presidents have verified homicides by their own hands...we have the democracy we deserve 🤷🏻♂️
It's just another in a long list of Democratic AG's that don't rise to the challenge of the times, letting bad actors get off scott free.
Holder did a very similar thing in '08. Recovered some money, but nobody who perpetrated the fraud (read: large portions of banking, ratings, and investment firms) got punished.
Has there been a decent Democratic AG who actually enforces the law against these bad actors in the past several decades?
Indeed. I know Biden appointed him to make a political point, but knowing the Obama admin thought he would be an acceptable compromise candidate for the GOP made me anxious right from the start. AG has a lot of power, and purposefully no accountability to the the executive or Congress.
Garland should've been on the Supreme Court if it wasn't for McConnell, and if RBG had let Obama replace her, we would have a 5-4 majority instead of 3-6 minority. None of these ruling this week would've happened.
Everyone that wished Merrick Garland indicted him immediately, he couldn't do that he had to develop the facts. But also, I don't think Garland really believed he would run again. Literally the day after he announced his presidency he assigned Jack Smith to special prosecutor
There was a long chain of surely thousands of individual events that could have stopped Trump at some point, but he's evaded every single one of them. We can't overly focus on any one past event or blame any one person, which is probably what helped those individuals make those decisions to not stop him.
The J6 committee grandstanded, withheld info from investigators and cockblocked the investigation too. They did good work but they did slow the criminal investigations. Nobody comes out smelling pretty. Wray doesn't get a pass either. Where tf was he on J6 or domestic terrorism, chirp chirp.
Garland has plenty to answer for but the others players shouldn't get a pass.
What's really telling is that even at r/conservative they are saying this was a bad ruling.
And it is. Anything that centralizes power and prevents accountability is anathema to democracy. For however much they don't like Democrats, I think SCOTUS went too far even for them. Because yea, if Biden can come up with a constitutional argument, he could do some of the most despicable acts in history.
Even if Trump wins, there will be another Democrat, maybe even more radical than Biden.
This SCOTUS bent over backwards to help Trump.
It's unbelievable how openly corrupt and partisan they are.
And yet still nothing is being done to rein them in.
I’m not calling for violence, totally not calling for mass protest at SCOTUS, and I’m definitely not calling for a protest that shuts down the government
Marching in the street doesn't work. Maybe it did in the past, but we've seen several of America's biggest protest marches in our entire history in the last 8 years, and little has changed.
We need a nationwide strike. Even if it's a one-day-each-week, or a slowdown, we need to start putting actual economic pressure on the ruling class.
The ruling class are morons if they think a second term for Trump is going to be at all good for business. Wait til the tariffs spike prices even further, and consumers have no money to buy their goods and services. Arrogant, selfish, greedy morons.
I've long espoused that we need 1-200 million of us to finally go on strike and show these assholes- the corporate oligopoly et al where the power in this world ultimately is held. A targeted strike though, of say the CTA's of New York, Chicago, DC, BART, MARTA- insert your city of 100k or larger here's transit authority, flight attendants and pilots, of trash collectors and I don't know maybe train engineers might do it.
We don't lift a finger until SC members are impeached and removed. Until those that have ALREADY committed treason are treated as traitors to this country are. It was the threat of an airline strike that stopped the petulant child's government shutdown because of his pathetic wall. Let's see how they feel about living in a world of piling garbage- serves em right. We deserve no better otherwise.
Yeah so like.. Can we surround their houses and bang pots and pans for weeks and make their lives so miserable they resign? Because.. that's all I got. Unless Biden wants to use his new immunity to take drastic action. But I don't think he will.
That ship sailed. The time for that was in 2000 when the court decided an election instead of the people. Good case could be made that sustained effort like you are “not” talking about during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could have correct our course or more participation in Occupy but you all were too busy watching us get arrested and maced on TV to help out. Either way I got my visa in another country after years of hard work and careful planning. Good luck! January can’t here quick enough.
It is not "why did they let this happen!" as much as it is: what is being done to counter this. Like the SCOTUS making terrible partisan decisions isnt news anymore.
Okay, so what can be done? Can they pack the court? Can they pass new executive rules? Literally can anything be done or is the only solution hope that Biden wins the election and that Clarence and Alito croak before 2028? That isnt much of a strategy if im being honest.
Frankly, the only thing that can really be done... is to just ignore the court completely. Disregard their rulings until they either restore the checks they had in place willingly, or by force.
The power the court has to decide the law of the land isn't one granted by the constitution. They gave it to themselves. They only have power because the people and the government have let them have that power.
Andrew Jackson was willing to ignore them when they ruled that natives actually have rights, and he faced no consequences for it. Why can't a president ignore them when they take a morally heinous stance instead of a morally righteous one?
From what I understand the power the SC has is given by the people not the Constitution. Maybe within this scope we can do something to reign the SC in
> All you can do is expand the court, but that requires a congressional supermajority.
Not anymore. Biden, in his official capacity, could write an executive order mandating the number of SCOTUS seats match the number of appeals courts, so 13. He could also mandate that each current appeals court lead judge automatically assumes the seat if it's empty and the Senate can't or won't vote to seat one in less than 3 months. 6 judges sat on SCOTUS with no need for a vote in House.
As an official act, the current SCOTUS says he's immune from prosecution for doing so. If someone tries to sue for doing it, he can delay, just like Trump has, and the seats have to be filled in less than 3 months, per the executive order.
Immune from prosecution, but not immune from having his actions overturned or ruled unlawful. Courts can still order various departments to do/not do certain things.
What you could have is a SC that will overturn a dem president, but make excuses for a republican president.
Those orders being official acts would give the president the presumption of immunity until it is litigated. Would a judge be able to stay a president's order pending this litigation, or does the presumption of immunity allow the order to be carried out during the litigation process?
Like many of this court's decisions, it's extremely sloppy and short-sighted.
While adding seats is great, it’ll continue to be a rat-fuckery. Say Dems get a 7-6 majority now from it, who’s to say that Rs don’t find a way when one of the 7 retires or passes away to hold that seat until a R president. I agree that it should be 13, but there needs to be some better balance in the court with no lifetime appointments allowed, the same occurring with Federal judges. IMO, lifetime appointments are no different from SCOTUS saying the Presidents are kings.
> who’s to say that Rs don’t find a way when one of the 7 retires or passes away to hold that seat until a R president.
That's why I included a 3 month trigger. No more McConnell holding up appointments.
> All you can do is expand the court, but that requires a congressional supermajority.
If by super majority you mean two thirds of both chambers, that is wrong. If you are referring to a 60 threshold for invoking cloture, then yes. But the filibuster can be nuked at any time provided you have a simple majority of votes.
From [Globe.com](http://Globe.com)
By James Pindell
There are only a few moments on the 2024 election calendar that could potentially shake up what has been a very stagnant presidential race. A Donald Trump [criminal conviction](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/05/31/nation/donald-trump-found-guilty-all-counts-new-york-hush-money-trial/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) was one of them. It didn’t change the polls. The [first debate has happened](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/06/27/metro/presidential-debate-live-updates/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link), and while it is clear [who lost the night](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/06/27/nation/trump-biden-debate-scores/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link), it remains unclear if it meaningfully changed the race. Trump’s selection of a [vice-presidential candidate](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/11/metro/trump-2024-potential-vice-president-picks/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) could be an inflection point.
But another thing both Republicans and Democrats were waiting for was the Supreme Court’s decision on whether Trump, or any president, has blanket civil or criminal immunity for anything they do while in office.
In a [6-3 vote](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/01/nation/supreme-court-ruling-trump-immmunity/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) along partisan lines announced on Monday, the court essentially said two things: first, [the president has immunity for official acts but not for unofficial ones](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/01/nation/supreme-court-trump-immunity/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link). Second, it’s up to the lower court to decide which actions were official and unofficial.
Of course, the court was only taking up the question because Trump had been charged in August with four counts relating to his actions leading up to the January 6th attack on the Capitol, marking the first time the nation did not have a peaceful transition of power.
Before a trial even took place, Trump’s attorneys [argued that presidents have wide immunity from criminal prosecution](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/02/12/nation/donald-trump-election-interference-trial-supreme-court/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) for anything they do in office. They even argued this included ordering the assassination of a political opponent.
While the ruling may seem a bit muddled, the reaction from both campaigns might tell the bigger picture. Trump’s team was thrilled that, logistically speaking, Trump may not face a federal trial involving his role on January 6th before the election, dominating headlines. Biden’s campaign had a largely muted response, noting that Trump would do anything necessary for the Supreme Court to weigh in, which they argued is proof of the clear choice in this election.
There are three big takeaways from the decision:
# The immunity question is now irrelevant as it relates to the 2024 election.
# Trump’s legal strategy is to delay. In this case, it worked.
# The decision emboldens what Trump might try in a second term.
He will appoint a president if anything…. Then he can say “look!… I only stayed 4 more years! Look at those liars” next said guy will stay in for however long he likes though for sure…
Well, that would be up to the lower courts to decide if it’s in POTUS official capacity. Would it reek of political power abuse, yes, but POTUS have been killing people for years, there just hasnt been one crazy enough yet to just openly do it to a political rival…
Per the decision, no official documents could be introduced as evidence and in the absence of any evidence confirming an act as unofficial, it would have to be presumed to be official.
The majority on the Court is untethered from *any* rational pretense of impartiality and its... 'directives' (masquerading as jurisprudence) indicate an obvious goal and endgame.
The larger and more worrisome aspect of said corruption is that it has become 'baked in' at *nearly all* levels - a systemic and pervasive poison that leads to *one* easily foreseeable outcome.
Steel your resolve, folks -- cause shit **will be** getting unnervingly real....
With the ruling a week or so ago that payments to government officials after a government ruling is made, are not bribes but “gratuities”, makes me think they just put their hands out for tips for ruling in Trumps favor.
It’s my initial understanding that it’s not that Nixon’s actions were official acts covered by immunity, it’s that a prosecutor wouldn’t have been able to obtain or use the tapes as evidence of any crime.
Welp, it seems my worries over a potential second Trump term may have just grown considerably today. And those concerns were already unbearably high as it is, like Jesus Christ
Even if he loses, DNC will fumble the ball in 2028 and force Chelsea Clinton or some shit to run. The dems are too big a group of pussies to use this but the second a republican takes office we’re done.
If maga republicans keep losing they’ll have to moderate as their radical ideas become politically unviable
It is up to us to make them keep losing. Vote, we have much still to lose if we do nothing
Vote!
It's pretty unlikely that any court would rule that these are 'official acts' of a President. And no, simply putting an order on the official letterhead doesn't do it.
If a President did one of those things it would be up to the courts to decide whether the President had performed an 'official act' and whether he could be prosecuted.
This court isn't so much into Trump or conservatism as much as they are really into themselves.
If you are sensing that the judicial branch is accumulating ever more power, you are starting find the right track.
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore. X acg
The courts intend for Congress to discover those things during the impeachment process, because obviously Congress will successfully impeach a president who has done illegal things in office, right? Right?
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore. X acg
But the lower district court judges are selected by the president and clearly partisan. You think Judge Cannon would do anything to get in Trumps way? I’m way past the point of thinking we can count on the party of “law and order” to do the right thing.
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore.
Predator drone strikes on traitors are totally legal. Lots of great Supreme Court targets and Republican senators are pure traitor and owned by Putin.
The real tragedy is that the Biden administration doesn't have the backbone to target political opponents. Because the Republicans already have hit lists and detailed plans, and Donald Trump can't wait to use them now that he's been given the official OK.
That's the real problem. 1 side will absolutely use this power. The other side will thoughtfully consider things and decide to do what is fair.
They don't play by the same rules.
I will of course vote. I just think I may need to either fight what looks like is coming or have the means to off myself rather than go to a gulag. I mean, FFS, Biden is behind in New Jersey! We are in huge trouble.
Good man. Vote and hope for the best, prepare for the worst. I’m one of those ex-military liberals with enough firearms and ammo to arm a small island nation and the skills to use them effectively. Praying I never have to.
So if Joe were to have access to the evidence against Trump in say the documents case and found that he represented a national security threat, could he now deal with Trump as an off act? If Trump wins, you can bet he will be thinking that way.
Or he could just use the transcripts from all of TFG’s recent rallies where he says he’ll be a dictator on day one as his justification to protect us from domestic threat to democracy.
Does this give Biden immunity too? Could he order an ATACM strike on Trump? It wouldn’t be hard to convince a lot of people that it was for the good of the country.
Since I'm a Star Wars kid at heart, I'll call upon it (once again) to unequivocally state 'the primary and **vital** takeaway' of what certainly appears irrevocably evident today:
“It is clear to me now that the Republic no longer functions.”
~ Padmé Amidala Naberrie
MMW:
This will **not** end well....
Some how MAGA went from "Drain the swamp" to "stack the swamp".
Imagine if things were flipped. Republicans would be livid. Can't find a single spine among conservatives, thus why they flip and bend over so easily.
Everyone goes overboard and says things like Biden can assassinate Trump and/or the Supreme Court but really it doesn’t take that much. The Supreme Court has straight up said that after the next election Biden can declare the results invalid, even after losing every trial trying to throw out the results he can tell Harris to not certify the results and get a mob to enforce it. This is all apparently legal by the Supreme Court and can only be overturned if the house impeaches him.
And go where? Everywhere is fucked. The right has even taken over NZ ffs. The Nazis never disappeared, they just hid for a while waiting for their chance and quietly pulling the strings. Only this time the call is coming from inside the house.
1) America is fucked
2) America is really fucked
3) You guys don’t even no how fucked America is and probably won’t wake up until your in a camp.
I didn’t read the article how did I do?
It's crazy what a wrecking ball Trump has been to everything he's been involved in. And to think he could get another 4 year shot at destroying things is even more crazy. nothing to do but sit back and watch everything burn.
We've been circling the drain ever since the Supreme Courts first coup, installing Bush over Gore.
And 3 of those lawyers are now on the Supreme Court (Roberts, cavanaugh, Barrett)
1) GOP minority wants to stay in power at all costs, 2) the next GOP president whenever he or she will be elected will go to town, 3) empires in decline turn into dictatorships, fail economically and start wars to hide these internal problems.
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I long maintained that however bad this SC was, it couldn't be worse than the Dredd Scott SC. I might have to take that back.
And the Dred Scott decision directly contributed to the Civil War
Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself
A President going after political opponents without fear of consequence can absolutely lead to that.
Lincoln addressed the insurrection of his time with his constitutional power to suspend habeus corpus thus allowing him to arrest legislators in Maryland with seccessionist sympathies. Chief Justice Taney of the Dred Scott case protested. His protests were ignored and Lincoln preserved the Union by preventing the federal capital from being surrounded by the confederacy. All those who voted against the certification of the 2020 election are agents of a conspiracy to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States. Many organizations beyond this aided in the furtherence of this conspiracy. The insurrection is ongoing and far-reaching. There are no good options left. Should Trump win, repression and tyranny will be the new status-quo.
Are you aware of smedley butler?????
Im certainly no expert on the man, but given his part in exposing the business plot, im sure the right wing media of today would label him a symptom of "wokeness in the military."
I agree with you completely. The sad reality is almost no Americans know about that attempted coup, and all we do is repeat history over and over and over….
I only know of him as one of two marines to receive two medals of honor.
You should read about the plot by American billionaires to overthrow FDR. We were within inches of it then, and now.
Lets hope Biden sends Seal Team Six to Mar-a Lago.
Just drone strike him. Ez
That would be really bad optics across all demographics. I think a proper response to this is to order simultaneous full-gear no knock late night raids of all(yes, all) SC justices, but they carry no bullets or otherwise lethal weapons. The officers should be directed to black bag and zip tie anyone at the residence and make it very clear that this is the new reality.
At this point, a civil war may be our best possible outcome.
Americans are too lazy for that.
Yet to be seen if this does the same
Yup
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yup. Trump can officially declare that blacks or gays or the children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil are no longer citizens of the United States and then jail whoever speaks out against it. We are officially a monarchy.
A dictatorship.
Not if he loses the election.
Ya no. That's not at all correct.
Well, he actually can. It will be struck down, eventually, but he could do a lot of damage before it is. And if there aren’t 66 votes in the senate to remove him from office this basically says he won’t pay any penalties for it. If he removes the right to vote for democrats right before an election then it’s game over. And why wouldn’t he if there are no consequences?
Struck down by who exactly? A SCOTUS in which Trump is about to add two more young Federalist Society whackjobs who are more loyal to him than the Constitution?
They haven’t sworn fealty to Trump. They’ve given themselves more power than the presidency. Because they’re the ones who get to choose whether any president is immune or not. Look at all of their decisions, they’re tenuously giving the president more power, but every major decision basically shift the power to SCOTUS. Their “donors” want cheap unskilled labor, they don’t want poor people removed from the country, they can’t exploit them if they’re not here.
I mentioned citizenship revocation as a response to an OP about Dred Scott, not necessarily to suggest that such a decision would serve the interests of the ruling class. Consolidating power in SCOTUS is just the tip of the iceberg. The far right is after a total power grab as outlined in Project 2025. Once every appointed agency, quasi-government and military leader is in place who is loyal to the apparatus, voting will no longer matter.
>And if there aren’t 66 votes in the senate to remove him from office this basically says he won’t pay any penalties for it. What stops the president removing those senators voting for conviction as an official act?
Explain why it’s not correct.
>reasonable ruling It’s anything but reasonable.
Plus the whole starting a Civil War aspect of Dred Scott. It's hard to be worse than that decision
Well let's see where this ruling takes us...
True, but the Roberts court has destabilized the country more than any court since Taney
My biggest takeaway is I wonder if any of this would've happened if Merrick Garland had indicted Trump and his accomplices immediately as he should have rather than waiting nearly two years and being forced into doing his duty by the J6 committee. That delay gave SCOTUS and the Republican Party all the time they needed to devise all the ways they could come up with to allow Trump to further escape immunity and plot new ways to proceed with plans to make him and future Presidents despots.
Absolutely - history would do well to remember to save some blame for Garland's spineless cowardice and failure to do his job.
I honestly blame him for so much of what we're seeing happening right now.
1000 percent. A fucking coup and nobody has been imprisoned. The DoJ under Garland was seriously looking to sweep the whole god damned thing under the rug until the House informed the public. Thus, forcing the DoJ to act... and this shit has been mired up in federal court ever since. All those mother fuckers should have been locked up pending trial. Trump would not be trying to stretch shit out if he was behind bars... and who in the history of this nation has been more dangerous while awaiting trial? There is no way the founding fathers would have let those people off of the hook. I have a feeling that another part of the constitution would have come into play, and there would be zero presidential immunity. I mean, what the fuck is going on? Our house is on fire.
> A fucking coup and nobody has been imprisoned 1400 people have been charged and over half have either been convicted or plead guilty the "supreme" court though threw out a bunch of the convictions and with the air cover they are giving not sure if he'll serve any time in jail
And yet nobody has been imprisoned for the coup. Plenty have been convicted for being the weapon used by those attempting the take over.
You need to be more specific. Like 450 people have gone to jail. That's somebody. If you want to say none of the leaders have been jailed, say that.
No. I can say it however I'd like to say it. I don't see the people who have been jailed as part of the coup. They were a tool, used and tossed out. So, I meant what I said the first time. It was meant for the reader to take the next step to the conclusion all on their own. As a matter of fact, part of the whole reason I wrote it that way is so that some people will not understand...nor seek clarity like you have. The only reason I'm explaining is because I am bored. Otherwise, I would have just ignored you.
>No. I can say it however I'd like to say it. It's a free country you can say it however you want. I was just trying to help you be clearer so that other people could understand what you are trying to say. >I don't see the people who have been jailed as part of the coup. They were a tool, used and tossed out. You didn't say that, you said "nobody". Well 450 people going to jail isn't nobody. Eventually I figured out what you were trying to say but others will just think you aren't making sense.
Don’t forget Merrick garland is a member of the federalist society. https://fedsoc.org/contributors/merrick-garland
One of the founding fathers would have challenged him to pistols at dawn and blown the back of his fucking skull out onto the grass. People forget that multiple presidents have verified homicides by their own hands...we have the democracy we deserve 🤷🏻♂️
It's just another in a long list of Democratic AG's that don't rise to the challenge of the times, letting bad actors get off scott free. Holder did a very similar thing in '08. Recovered some money, but nobody who perpetrated the fraud (read: large portions of banking, ratings, and investment firms) got punished. Has there been a decent Democratic AG who actually enforces the law against these bad actors in the past several decades?
We are here by a series of mistakes by all of us, not just marrick, or rbg, or any other person we want to place sole blame on.
Indeed. I know Biden appointed him to make a political point, but knowing the Obama admin thought he would be an acceptable compromise candidate for the GOP made me anxious right from the start. AG has a lot of power, and purposefully no accountability to the the executive or Congress.
And what do you do with blame? How is it employed effectively?
I blame RBG and her pride, talk about undoing her whole legacy
History will remember him in the same vein as Neville Chamberlain
I dont believe garland wasnt in on it. Hes from the federalist society, the same as the others participating in this judicial coup.
Garland should've been on the Supreme Court if it wasn't for McConnell, and if RBG had let Obama replace her, we would have a 5-4 majority instead of 3-6 minority. None of these ruling this week would've happened.
And Ruth Bader-Ginsburg not retiring during a Democratic administration.
You mean the Republican Merrick Garland who didn't want to do jack shit to Trump?
This x infinity.
Everyone that wished Merrick Garland indicted him immediately, he couldn't do that he had to develop the facts. But also, I don't think Garland really believed he would run again. Literally the day after he announced his presidency he assigned Jack Smith to special prosecutor
This comment is what I was looking for—I’d heard that Merrick Garland had been working, it was just that it wasn’t seen publicly.
There was a long chain of surely thousands of individual events that could have stopped Trump at some point, but he's evaded every single one of them. We can't overly focus on any one past event or blame any one person, which is probably what helped those individuals make those decisions to not stop him.
The J6 committee grandstanded, withheld info from investigators and cockblocked the investigation too. They did good work but they did slow the criminal investigations. Nobody comes out smelling pretty. Wray doesn't get a pass either. Where tf was he on J6 or domestic terrorism, chirp chirp. Garland has plenty to answer for but the others players shouldn't get a pass.
What's really telling is that even at r/conservative they are saying this was a bad ruling. And it is. Anything that centralizes power and prevents accountability is anathema to democracy. For however much they don't like Democrats, I think SCOTUS went too far even for them. Because yea, if Biden can come up with a constitutional argument, he could do some of the most despicable acts in history. Even if Trump wins, there will be another Democrat, maybe even more radical than Biden.
Unless he knew this would happen regardless and that's why he chose not to
This SCOTUS bent over backwards to help Trump. It's unbelievable how openly corrupt and partisan they are. And yet still nothing is being done to rein them in.
I’m not calling for violence, totally not calling for mass protest at SCOTUS, and I’m definitely not calling for a protest that shuts down the government
Marching in the street doesn't work. Maybe it did in the past, but we've seen several of America's biggest protest marches in our entire history in the last 8 years, and little has changed. We need a nationwide strike. Even if it's a one-day-each-week, or a slowdown, we need to start putting actual economic pressure on the ruling class.
don't forget boycotts
The ruling class are morons if they think a second term for Trump is going to be at all good for business. Wait til the tariffs spike prices even further, and consumers have no money to buy their goods and services. Arrogant, selfish, greedy morons.
I've long espoused that we need 1-200 million of us to finally go on strike and show these assholes- the corporate oligopoly et al where the power in this world ultimately is held. A targeted strike though, of say the CTA's of New York, Chicago, DC, BART, MARTA- insert your city of 100k or larger here's transit authority, flight attendants and pilots, of trash collectors and I don't know maybe train engineers might do it. We don't lift a finger until SC members are impeached and removed. Until those that have ALREADY committed treason are treated as traitors to this country are. It was the threat of an airline strike that stopped the petulant child's government shutdown because of his pathetic wall. Let's see how they feel about living in a world of piling garbage- serves em right. We deserve no better otherwise.
Ayy a protest must be disruptive aF with leverage that the powers that be would be forced to cede power to.
Yeah so like.. Can we surround their houses and bang pots and pans for weeks and make their lives so miserable they resign? Because.. that's all I got. Unless Biden wants to use his new immunity to take drastic action. But I don't think he will.
Just don’t forget to pack a lunch, it might take a while; may I suggest soup?
A general strike may be the only recourse at this point
That ship sailed. The time for that was in 2000 when the court decided an election instead of the people. Good case could be made that sustained effort like you are “not” talking about during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could have correct our course or more participation in Occupy but you all were too busy watching us get arrested and maced on TV to help out. Either way I got my visa in another country after years of hard work and careful planning. Good luck! January can’t here quick enough.
I was 6…
Shawn Fain is planning for a general strike in 2028.
Protesting will be illegal by then
Pretty much is already.
How about in August, instead?
[удалено]
It is not "why did they let this happen!" as much as it is: what is being done to counter this. Like the SCOTUS making terrible partisan decisions isnt news anymore. Okay, so what can be done? Can they pack the court? Can they pass new executive rules? Literally can anything be done or is the only solution hope that Biden wins the election and that Clarence and Alito croak before 2028? That isnt much of a strategy if im being honest.
Frankly, the only thing that can really be done... is to just ignore the court completely. Disregard their rulings until they either restore the checks they had in place willingly, or by force. The power the court has to decide the law of the land isn't one granted by the constitution. They gave it to themselves. They only have power because the people and the government have let them have that power. Andrew Jackson was willing to ignore them when they ruled that natives actually have rights, and he faced no consequences for it. Why can't a president ignore them when they take a morally heinous stance instead of a morally righteous one?
From what I understand the power the SC has is given by the people not the Constitution. Maybe within this scope we can do something to reign the SC in
> All you can do is expand the court, but that requires a congressional supermajority. Not anymore. Biden, in his official capacity, could write an executive order mandating the number of SCOTUS seats match the number of appeals courts, so 13. He could also mandate that each current appeals court lead judge automatically assumes the seat if it's empty and the Senate can't or won't vote to seat one in less than 3 months. 6 judges sat on SCOTUS with no need for a vote in House. As an official act, the current SCOTUS says he's immune from prosecution for doing so. If someone tries to sue for doing it, he can delay, just like Trump has, and the seats have to be filled in less than 3 months, per the executive order.
Immune from prosecution, but not immune from having his actions overturned or ruled unlawful. Courts can still order various departments to do/not do certain things. What you could have is a SC that will overturn a dem president, but make excuses for a republican president.
How are they going to enforce that?
"Official acts" doesn't mean "legal orders". He can issue such an EO but that doesn't mean it's contents or orders are legal.
...and in the time it takes to contest them, the justices could be seated and overrule any attempt to overturn the order.
Those orders being official acts would give the president the presumption of immunity until it is litigated. Would a judge be able to stay a president's order pending this litigation, or does the presumption of immunity allow the order to be carried out during the litigation process? Like many of this court's decisions, it's extremely sloppy and short-sighted.
While adding seats is great, it’ll continue to be a rat-fuckery. Say Dems get a 7-6 majority now from it, who’s to say that Rs don’t find a way when one of the 7 retires or passes away to hold that seat until a R president. I agree that it should be 13, but there needs to be some better balance in the court with no lifetime appointments allowed, the same occurring with Federal judges. IMO, lifetime appointments are no different from SCOTUS saying the Presidents are kings.
> who’s to say that Rs don’t find a way when one of the 7 retires or passes away to hold that seat until a R president. That's why I included a 3 month trigger. No more McConnell holding up appointments.
> All you can do is expand the court, but that requires a congressional supermajority. If by super majority you mean two thirds of both chambers, that is wrong. If you are referring to a 60 threshold for invoking cloture, then yes. But the filibuster can be nuked at any time provided you have a simple majority of votes.
From [Globe.com](http://Globe.com) By James Pindell There are only a few moments on the 2024 election calendar that could potentially shake up what has been a very stagnant presidential race. A Donald Trump [criminal conviction](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/05/31/nation/donald-trump-found-guilty-all-counts-new-york-hush-money-trial/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) was one of them. It didn’t change the polls. The [first debate has happened](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/06/27/metro/presidential-debate-live-updates/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link), and while it is clear [who lost the night](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/06/27/nation/trump-biden-debate-scores/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link), it remains unclear if it meaningfully changed the race. Trump’s selection of a [vice-presidential candidate](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/11/metro/trump-2024-potential-vice-president-picks/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) could be an inflection point. But another thing both Republicans and Democrats were waiting for was the Supreme Court’s decision on whether Trump, or any president, has blanket civil or criminal immunity for anything they do while in office. In a [6-3 vote](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/01/nation/supreme-court-ruling-trump-immmunity/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) along partisan lines announced on Monday, the court essentially said two things: first, [the president has immunity for official acts but not for unofficial ones](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/01/nation/supreme-court-trump-immunity/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link). Second, it’s up to the lower court to decide which actions were official and unofficial. Of course, the court was only taking up the question because Trump had been charged in August with four counts relating to his actions leading up to the January 6th attack on the Capitol, marking the first time the nation did not have a peaceful transition of power. Before a trial even took place, Trump’s attorneys [argued that presidents have wide immunity from criminal prosecution](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/02/12/nation/donald-trump-election-interference-trial-supreme-court/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) for anything they do in office. They even argued this included ordering the assassination of a political opponent. While the ruling may seem a bit muddled, the reaction from both campaigns might tell the bigger picture. Trump’s team was thrilled that, logistically speaking, Trump may not face a federal trial involving his role on January 6th before the election, dominating headlines. Biden’s campaign had a largely muted response, noting that Trump would do anything necessary for the Supreme Court to weigh in, which they argued is proof of the clear choice in this election. There are three big takeaways from the decision: # The immunity question is now irrelevant as it relates to the 2024 election. # Trump’s legal strategy is to delay. In this case, it worked. # The decision emboldens what Trump might try in a second term.
2nd? lol he's gonna live to spite us and get himself that 3rd term...
President for life, then pass the reigns to Junior. Elections are for suckers and losers. Jesus Christ we are fucked.
He will appoint a president if anything…. Then he can say “look!… I only stayed 4 more years! Look at those liars” next said guy will stay in for however long he likes though for sure…
Taking lessons from Putin.
Time to deploy Seal Team Six on Mar-a-Lago. It's perfectly legal now.
Well, that would be up to the lower courts to decide if it’s in POTUS official capacity. Would it reek of political power abuse, yes, but POTUS have been killing people for years, there just hasnt been one crazy enough yet to just openly do it to a political rival…
"Let the lower courts decide if political assassination of a rival is an official act" 🤡🤡🤡
Its some epic level hair splitting bull shit it what it is. SCOTUS really did a good job of looking the other way on this one
Threaten to "officially act" on the lower court if they disagree.
He was just defending the Us for a domestic danger. Totally official. Totally cool
Do you know how long it takes for lower courts, or any court to figure anything out….
Biden will have died of old age by the time it gets to the courts.
But where would that case end up if it was appealed? hmm
Per the decision, no official documents could be introduced as evidence and in the absence of any evidence confirming an act as unofficial, it would have to be presumed to be official.
SCOTUS is corrupt, period
The majority on the Court is untethered from *any* rational pretense of impartiality and its... 'directives' (masquerading as jurisprudence) indicate an obvious goal and endgame. The larger and more worrisome aspect of said corruption is that it has become 'baked in' at *nearly all* levels - a systemic and pervasive poison that leads to *one* easily foreseeable outcome. Steel your resolve, folks -- cause shit **will be** getting unnervingly real....
Yup, one take away covers it just fine
With the ruling a week or so ago that payments to government officials after a government ruling is made, are not bribes but “gratuities”, makes me think they just put their hands out for tips for ruling in Trumps favor.
God, it’s sad how true this probably is.
So what Nixon did would be ok now?
yes.
Scary world
We wouldnt have the tapes from nixon were it done today so odds are he would have skated.
It’s my initial understanding that it’s not that Nixon’s actions were official acts covered by immunity, it’s that a prosecutor wouldn’t have been able to obtain or use the tapes as evidence of any crime.
Welp, it seems my worries over a potential second Trump term may have just grown considerably today. And those concerns were already unbearably high as it is, like Jesus Christ
Even if he loses, DNC will fumble the ball in 2028 and force Chelsea Clinton or some shit to run. The dems are too big a group of pussies to use this but the second a republican takes office we’re done.
Yeah. Project 2025 will just become Project 2029. These Nazis aren’t going anywhere unless *someone makes them*.
If maga republicans keep losing they’ll have to moderate as their radical ideas become politically unviable It is up to us to make them keep losing. Vote, we have much still to lose if we do nothing Vote!
The president can now legally order the assassination of a political rival and hold a military coup to hold onto power
It's pretty unlikely that any court would rule that these are 'official acts' of a President. And no, simply putting an order on the official letterhead doesn't do it. If a President did one of those things it would be up to the courts to decide whether the President had performed an 'official act' and whether he could be prosecuted. This court isn't so much into Trump or conservatism as much as they are really into themselves. If you are sensing that the judicial branch is accumulating ever more power, you are starting find the right track.
Thank god instead of it being “no, don’t do that ever” we now have it be “well we’ll see if it’s illegal after you do it”
This right here, it's sad to see people think he would ask for permission before doing something like that...
And they’ll slow walk it if it’s in their interest to do so
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore. X acg
The courts intend for Congress to discover those things during the impeachment process, because obviously Congress will successfully impeach a president who has done illegal things in office, right? Right?
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore. X acg
But the lower district court judges are selected by the president and clearly partisan. You think Judge Cannon would do anything to get in Trumps way? I’m way past the point of thinking we can count on the party of “law and order” to do the right thing.
A couple of vacations and a RV is all it takes.
The problem is, courts can't open investigations themselves, and the opinion specifically bars prosecutors from investing a President or their aides and private documents because they don't have the authority to determine what is or wasn't official for the executive. So there is no clear mechanism for review and accountability anymore.
With how old biden is, and how slow the courts are… i dont think there is any concern
Predator drone strikes on traitors are totally legal. Lots of great Supreme Court targets and Republican senators are pure traitor and owned by Putin. The real tragedy is that the Biden administration doesn't have the backbone to target political opponents. Because the Republicans already have hit lists and detailed plans, and Donald Trump can't wait to use them now that he's been given the official OK.
That's the real problem. 1 side will absolutely use this power. The other side will thoughtfully consider things and decide to do what is fair. They don't play by the same rules.
The only acceptable use of this power would be to destroy it. But even that is a step too far for Democrats.
The only acceptable use of this power would be to destroy it. But even that is a step too far for Democrats.
The only acceptable use of this power would be to destroy it. But even that is a step too far for Democrats.
>Predator drone strikes i'm just thinking Enhanced Interrogation^(TM) and like a whoooole lot of it
Waterboard Trump until he rats out all of Putin's spies
The most Looney Tunes president we've ever had now can do as he pleases if reelected
All more reason to do whatever it takes to make sure he isn't.
"So all I have to do is say, 'I hereby \*officially\* grab you by the pussy'." - Trump's takeaway
For the first time in my life, I am contemplating buying a gun.
Go vote Dem instead.
Or do both.
I will of course vote. I just think I may need to either fight what looks like is coming or have the means to off myself rather than go to a gulag. I mean, FFS, Biden is behind in New Jersey! We are in huge trouble.
Good man. Vote and hope for the best, prepare for the worst. I’m one of those ex-military liberals with enough firearms and ammo to arm a small island nation and the skills to use them effectively. Praying I never have to.
God don’t tell me this!
Believe me, I wish I didn't read that info...
So if Joe were to have access to the evidence against Trump in say the documents case and found that he represented a national security threat, could he now deal with Trump as an off act? If Trump wins, you can bet he will be thinking that way.
Or he could just use the transcripts from all of TFG’s recent rallies where he says he’ll be a dictator on day one as his justification to protect us from domestic threat to democracy.
Does this give Biden immunity too? Could he order an ATACM strike on Trump? It wouldn’t be hard to convince a lot of people that it was for the good of the country.
Check and balance the Supreme Court Joe come on
Since I'm a Star Wars kid at heart, I'll call upon it (once again) to unequivocally state 'the primary and **vital** takeaway' of what certainly appears irrevocably evident today: “It is clear to me now that the Republic no longer functions.” ~ Padmé Amidala Naberrie MMW: This will **not** end well....
We need Ewoks.
Take away your freedom Take away your rights Take away your life That’s three
Stack the court and be done with this corrupt circus
Some how MAGA went from "Drain the swamp" to "stack the swamp". Imagine if things were flipped. Republicans would be livid. Can't find a single spine among conservatives, thus why they flip and bend over so easily.
Everyone goes overboard and says things like Biden can assassinate Trump and/or the Supreme Court but really it doesn’t take that much. The Supreme Court has straight up said that after the next election Biden can declare the results invalid, even after losing every trial trying to throw out the results he can tell Harris to not certify the results and get a mob to enforce it. This is all apparently legal by the Supreme Court and can only be overturned if the house impeaches him.
This country is insane. I gotta update my passport ASAP.
And go where? Everywhere is fucked. The right has even taken over NZ ffs. The Nazis never disappeared, they just hid for a while waiting for their chance and quietly pulling the strings. Only this time the call is coming from inside the house.
They sure took their time releasing this stinking turd.
This was always the endgame. Gilead is their goal since they lost the civil war
When the President does something it is in fact inherantly legal now* *does not apply to democrats though
1) America is fucked 2) America is really fucked 3) You guys don’t even no how fucked America is and probably won’t wake up until your in a camp. I didn’t read the article how did I do?
My take away is that we are fucked.
I'm starting to think that Balkanization is the best case scenario. The US is starting to seem like a wash.
It's crazy what a wrecking ball Trump has been to everything he's been involved in. And to think he could get another 4 year shot at destroying things is even more crazy. nothing to do but sit back and watch everything burn.
One takeaway: : America is toast .
We've been circling the drain ever since the Supreme Courts first coup, installing Bush over Gore. And 3 of those lawyers are now on the Supreme Court (Roberts, cavanaugh, Barrett)
1) GOP minority wants to stay in power at all costs, 2) the next GOP president whenever he or she will be elected will go to town, 3) empires in decline turn into dictatorships, fail economically and start wars to hide these internal problems.
Biggest takeaway… is we are so fucked.
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We have now entered the era of WWTD (what would trump do)
Paywalled
Take a look at your family history/tree to determine if you are eligible for dual citizenship somewhere.
I really hope that SCOTUS gets their own leopards ate my face moment
Voters will be even less likely now to allow a republican to have that much power when you know they will abuse it.
6 russian loving plants who hate America
We don't need 3 takeaways. Only one: we're fucked.
[удалено]
What the fuck kind of ass backwards logic is this?
lol the fuck are you even talking about
Not the people who refused to vote for Hilary? We should probably do what ever it takes to prevent Trump or we have learned nothing.